Mueller Has (Probably) Subpoenaed Donny

The forum for general posting. Come join the madness. :)
Message
Author
User avatar
Bob78164
Bored Moderator
Posts: 18808
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:02 pm
Location: By the phone

Mueller Has (Probably) Subpoenaed Donny

#1 Post by Bob78164 » Wed Oct 31, 2018 9:30 am

As this story explains, a review of the docket of the United States Court of Appeal for the D.C. Circuit makes it appear very likely that Donny is currently appealing an order from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia issuing a subpoena requiring Donny to appear and testify before a grand jury. The author of the story is absolutely right about the breakneck speed with which the case he describes is proceeding. --Bob
"Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear." Thomas Jefferson

User avatar
silverscreenselect
Posts: 17013
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:21 pm
Contact:

Re: Mueller Has (Probably) Subpoenaed Donny

#2 Post by silverscreenselect » Wed Oct 31, 2018 10:00 am

That's nothing compared to the blizzard of subpoenas that will start flying around the first of January when the new House (and hopefully Senate as well) is sworn in.
Check out our website: http://www.silverscreenvideos.com

User avatar
jarnon
Posts: 4976
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 9:52 pm
Location: Merion, Pa.

Re: Mueller Has (Probably) Subpoenaed Donny

#3 Post by jarnon » Wed Oct 31, 2018 10:52 am

silverscreenselect wrote:That's nothing compared to the blizzard of subpoenas that will start flying around the first of January when the new House (and hopefully Senate as well) is sworn in.
This is speculation. Mueller is keeping very quiet around election time (unlike some investigators in 2016). But from what we know from before October, he (along with federal and state prosecutors in New York) have already questioned most of Trump's inner circle.

User avatar
Bob78164
Bored Moderator
Posts: 18808
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:02 pm
Location: By the phone

Re: Mueller Has (Probably) Subpoenaed Donny

#4 Post by Bob78164 » Wed Oct 31, 2018 11:36 am

jarnon wrote:
silverscreenselect wrote:That's nothing compared to the blizzard of subpoenas that will start flying around the first of January when the new House (and hopefully Senate as well) is sworn in.
This is speculation. Mueller is keeping very quiet around election time (unlike some investigators in 2016). But from what we know from before October, he (along with federal and state prosecutors in New York) have already questioned most of Trump's inner circle.
It's not speculation. It's informed inference based on the docket and other evidence laid out in the article. It may not be right, but I can't think of another plausible explanation for the D.C. Circuit's remarkably quick action with respect to the District Court's order. --Bob
"Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear." Thomas Jefferson

User avatar
silverscreenselect
Posts: 17013
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:21 pm
Contact:

Re: Mueller Has (Probably) Subpoenaed Donny

#5 Post by silverscreenselect » Wed Oct 31, 2018 11:45 am

jarnon wrote:
silverscreenselect wrote:That's nothing compared to the blizzard of subpoenas that will start flying around the first of January when the new House (and hopefully Senate as well) is sworn in.
This is speculation. Mueller is keeping very quiet around election time (unlike some investigators in 2016). But from what we know from before October, he (along with federal and state prosecutors in New York) have already questioned most of Trump's inner circle.
These subpoenas would be coming from Congressional inquiries.
Check out our website: http://www.silverscreenvideos.com

User avatar
jarnon
Posts: 4976
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 9:52 pm
Location: Merion, Pa.

Re: Mueller Has (Probably) Subpoenaed Donny

#6 Post by jarnon » Wed Oct 31, 2018 11:47 am

Bob78164 wrote:
jarnon wrote:
silverscreenselect wrote:That's nothing compared to the blizzard of subpoenas that will start flying around the first of January when the new House (and hopefully Senate as well) is sworn in.
This is speculation. Mueller is keeping very quiet around election time (unlike some investigators in 2016). But from what we know from before October, he (along with federal and state prosecutors in New York) have already questioned most of Trump's inner circle.
It's not speculation. It's informed inference based on the docket and other evidence laid out in the article. It may not be right, but I can't think of another plausible explanation for the D.C. Circuit's remarkably quick action with respect to the District Court's order. --Bob
No, Bob, I'm agreeing with you. The speculation is SSS's "that's nothing." I predict that the House Democrats will find little that Mueller doesn't already know about. But there are plenty of House committees and lots of other officials they can investigate: Wilbur Ross, Mulvaney, Mnuchin, Zinke, DeVos, etc.

User avatar
silverscreenselect
Posts: 17013
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:21 pm
Contact:

Re: Mueller Has (Probably) Subpoenaed Donny

#7 Post by silverscreenselect » Wed Oct 31, 2018 11:59 am

jarnon wrote:I predict that the House Democrats will find little that Mueller doesn't already know about.
But they can make a lot of information public that Mueller can't simply by holding public hearings. And that's especially true if Trump tries to get rid of Mueller after the election.
Check out our website: http://www.silverscreenvideos.com

User avatar
Bob78164
Bored Moderator
Posts: 18808
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:02 pm
Location: By the phone

Re: Mueller Has (Probably) Subpoenaed Donny

#8 Post by Bob78164 » Wed Oct 31, 2018 12:19 pm

jarnon wrote:
Bob78164 wrote:
jarnon wrote:This is speculation. Mueller is keeping very quiet around election time (unlike some investigators in 2016). But from what we know from before October, he (along with federal and state prosecutors in New York) have already questioned most of Trump's inner circle.
It's not speculation. It's informed inference based on the docket and other evidence laid out in the article. It may not be right, but I can't think of another plausible explanation for the D.C. Circuit's remarkably quick action with respect to the District Court's order. --Bob
No, Bob, I'm agreeing with you. The speculation is SSS's "that's nothing." I predict that the House Democrats will find little that Mueller doesn't already know about. But there are plenty of House committees and lots of other officials they can investigate: Wilbur Ross, Mulvaney, Mnuchin, Zinke, DeVos, etc.
Ah, I misunderstood you.

I do suspect House Democrats will find lots to investigate, starting with violations of the Emoluments Clause, that Mueller hasn't looked into because he considers it outside his mandate. --Bob
"Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear." Thomas Jefferson

User avatar
Bob78164
Bored Moderator
Posts: 18808
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:02 pm
Location: By the phone

Re: Mueller Has (Probably) Subpoenaed Donny

#9 Post by Bob78164 » Wed Oct 31, 2018 12:43 pm

silverscreenselect wrote:
jarnon wrote:I predict that the House Democrats will find little that Mueller doesn't already know about.
But they can make a lot of information public that Mueller can't simply by holding public hearings. And that's especially true if Trump tries to get rid of Mueller after the election.
Starting with Donny's tax returns. It's about time we found out what he's been hiding. --Bob
"Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear." Thomas Jefferson

User avatar
flockofseagulls104
Posts: 5162
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 8:07 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA

Re: Mueller Has (Probably) Subpoenaed Donny

#10 Post by flockofseagulls104 » Wed Oct 31, 2018 2:19 pm

You're all wrong. He subpoenaed Hillary.
Your friendly neighborhood racist. On the waiting list to be a nazi. Designated an honorary 'snowflake'. Trolled by the very best, as well as by BJ. Always typical, unlike others.., Fulminator, Hopelessly in the tank for trump... inappropriate... Flocking himself... Probably a tucking sexist, too... All thought comes from the right wing noise machine(TM)... A clear and present threat to The Future Of Our Democracy.. Doesn't understand anything

User avatar
jarnon
Posts: 4976
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 9:52 pm
Location: Merion, Pa.

Re: Mueller Has (Probably) Subpoenaed Donny

#11 Post by jarnon » Thu Nov 01, 2018 1:26 pm

This is undoubtedly a different case, since the names involved don't match, but I'm sure Bob will be intrigued:

Supreme Court Blocks Commerce Secretary Questioning In Census Lawsuits, For Now

This line caught my eye, for its hypocrisy and astounding chutzpah:
The administration argues the Justice Department's civil rights division, currently led by Gore, needs the question on citizenship in the census in order to better enforce the Voting Rights Act protections against racial discrimination.

User avatar
BackInTex
Posts: 10832
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:43 pm
Location: In Texas of course!

Re: Mueller Has (Probably) Subpoenaed Donny

#12 Post by BackInTex » Thu Nov 01, 2018 1:41 pm

jarnon wrote:This is undoubtedly a different case, since the names involved don't match, but I'm sure Bob will be intrigued:

Supreme Court Blocks Commerce Secretary Questioning In Census Lawsuits, For Now

This line caught my eye, for its hypocrisy and astounding chutzpah:
The administration argues the Justice Department's civil rights division, currently led by Gore, needs the question on citizenship in the census in order to better enforce the Voting Rights Act protections against racial discrimination.
I find it extremely illogical for the census to NOT ask about citizenship.
In the end, they will all pretty much taste the same.

User avatar
earendel
Posts: 12846
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 5:25 am
Location: mired in the bureaucracy

Re: Mueller Has (Probably) Subpoenaed Donny

#13 Post by earendel » Thu Nov 01, 2018 1:59 pm

BackInTex wrote:
jarnon wrote:This is undoubtedly a different case, since the names involved don't match, but I'm sure Bob will be intrigued:

Supreme Court Blocks Commerce Secretary Questioning In Census Lawsuits, For Now

This line caught my eye, for its hypocrisy and astounding chutzpah:
The administration argues the Justice Department's civil rights division, currently led by Gore, needs the question on citizenship in the census in order to better enforce the Voting Rights Act protections against racial discrimination.
I find it extremely illogical for the census to NOT ask about citizenship.
Article 1, Section 2 of the Constitution mandates the census in order to apportion the number of representatives for each state (as well as taxation). The 14th Amendment (yes, the same one that grants "birthright citizenship"), Section 2, says that "the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed" are to be counted. It says nothing about counting only citizens.
"Elen sila lumenn omentielvo...A star shines on the hour of our meeting."

User avatar
silverscreenselect
Posts: 17013
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:21 pm
Contact:

Re: Mueller Has (Probably) Subpoenaed Donny

#14 Post by silverscreenselect » Thu Nov 01, 2018 3:29 pm

earendel wrote:
BackInTex wrote:
jarnon wrote:This is undoubtedly a different case, since the names involved don't match, but I'm sure Bob will be intrigued:

Supreme Court Blocks Commerce Secretary Questioning In Census Lawsuits, For Now

This line caught my eye, for its hypocrisy and astounding chutzpah:
I find it extremely illogical for the census to NOT ask about citizenship.
Article 1, Section 2 of the Constitution mandates the census in order to apportion the number of representatives for each state (as well as taxation). The 14th Amendment (yes, the same one that grants "birthright citizenship"), Section 2, says that "the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed" are to be counted. It says nothing about counting only citizens.
The only rationale in the Constitution for asking more detailed questions about the people living in the US was the provisions about slaves counting 3/5 of a person for the purposes of representation in the House. That went away when slavery was abolished.
Check out our website: http://www.silverscreenvideos.com

User avatar
BackInTex
Posts: 10832
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:43 pm
Location: In Texas of course!

Re: Mueller Has (Probably) Subpoenaed Donny

#15 Post by BackInTex » Thu Nov 01, 2018 6:01 pm

earendel wrote:
BackInTex wrote:
jarnon wrote:This is undoubtedly a different case, since the names involved don't match, but I'm sure Bob will be intrigued:

Supreme Court Blocks Commerce Secretary Questioning In Census Lawsuits, For Now

This line caught my eye, for its hypocrisy and astounding chutzpah:
I find it extremely illogical for the census to NOT ask about citizenship.
Article 1, Section 2 of the Constitution mandates the census in order to apportion the number of representatives for each state (as well as taxation). The 14th Amendment (yes, the same one that grants "birthright citizenship"), Section 2, says that "the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed" are to be counted. It says nothing about counting only citizens.
Where did I say only count citizens? I did not.

Citizenship status is as important, and in my opinion more important, than the other demographic information collected.
In the end, they will all pretty much taste the same.

User avatar
silverscreenselect
Posts: 17013
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:21 pm
Contact:

Re: Mueller Has (Probably) Subpoenaed Donny

#16 Post by silverscreenselect » Thu Nov 01, 2018 9:15 pm

BackInTex wrote: Citizenship status is as important, and in my opinion more important, than the other demographic information collected.
And the reason for not asking about citizenship is because people are less likely to answer questions accurately if they are essentially being asked to incriminate themselves or a family member.
Check out our website: http://www.silverscreenvideos.com

User avatar
Estonut
Evil Genius
Posts: 9752
Joined: Sat Oct 13, 2007 1:16 am
Location: Garden Grove, CA

Re: Mueller Has (Probably) Subpoenaed Donny

#17 Post by Estonut » Fri Nov 02, 2018 2:50 am

silverscreenselect wrote:
BackInTex wrote: Citizenship status is as important, and in my opinion more important, than the other demographic information collected.
And the reason for not asking about citizenship is because people are less likely to answer questions accurately if they are essentially being asked to incriminate themselves or a family member.
"Incriminate" implies they've committed crimes. I thought you just considered them "undocumented."
A child of five would understand this. Send someone to fetch a child of five.
Groucho Marx

User avatar
silverscreenselect
Posts: 17013
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:21 pm
Contact:

Re: Mueller Has (Probably) Subpoenaed Donny

#18 Post by silverscreenselect » Fri Nov 02, 2018 3:15 am

Estonut wrote: "Incriminate" implies they've committed crimes. I thought you just considered them "undocumented."
It doesn't matter what I consider them. It matters what the people taking the census, who represent Donald Trump's federal government consider them.
Check out our website: http://www.silverscreenvideos.com

User avatar
flockofseagulls104
Posts: 5162
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 8:07 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA

Re: Mueller Has (Probably) Subpoenaed Donny

#19 Post by flockofseagulls104 » Fri Nov 02, 2018 7:02 am

silverscreenselect wrote:
Estonut wrote: "Incriminate" implies they've committed crimes. I thought you just considered them "undocumented."
It doesn't matter what I consider them. It matters what the people taking the census, who represent Donald Trump's federal government consider them.
Silly me. I thought it was the LAW that determined those kinds of things.*



Footnotes:
Spoiler
* Hannity 3/4/18, Bitebart 4/10/17, Fox News 7/10/16, All other sources that can be ignored because they are not approved of by liberal thought police.
Your friendly neighborhood racist. On the waiting list to be a nazi. Designated an honorary 'snowflake'. Trolled by the very best, as well as by BJ. Always typical, unlike others.., Fulminator, Hopelessly in the tank for trump... inappropriate... Flocking himself... Probably a tucking sexist, too... All thought comes from the right wing noise machine(TM)... A clear and present threat to The Future Of Our Democracy.. Doesn't understand anything

User avatar
jarnon
Posts: 4976
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 9:52 pm
Location: Merion, Pa.

Re: Mueller Has (Probably) Subpoenaed Donny

#20 Post by jarnon » Fri Nov 02, 2018 10:28 am

flockofseagulls104 wrote:
silverscreenselect wrote:
Estonut wrote: "Incriminate" implies they've committed crimes. I thought you just considered them "undocumented."
It doesn't matter what I consider them. It matters what the people taking the census, who represent Donald Trump's federal government consider them.
Silly me. I thought it was the LAW that determined those kinds of things.
You're right, the law says the folks we call "undocumented" are in our country illegally.

The law also says census data can't be shared with other agencies like ICE. But many aliens don't know this, or distrust the federal government as a whole.

The law also says Trump can't exclude whole classes of people from the 14th Amendment, or order troops to shoot foreigners at the border, but Trump still makes these threats, to rally his supporters and annoy the opposition. Until the whole immigration mess is fixed, these political games will go on.

User avatar
BackInTex
Posts: 10832
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:43 pm
Location: In Texas of course!

Re: Mueller Has (Probably) Subpoenaed Donny

#21 Post by BackInTex » Fri Nov 02, 2018 10:40 am

jarnon wrote:
flockofseagulls104 wrote:
silverscreenselect wrote:
It doesn't matter what I consider them. It matters what the people taking the census, who represent Donald Trump's federal government consider them.
Silly me. I thought it was the LAW that determined those kinds of things.
You're right, the law says the folks we call "undocumented" are in our country illegally.

The law also says census data can't be shared with other agencies like ICE. But many aliens don't know this, or distrust the federal government as a whole.

The law also says Trump can't exclude whole classes of people from the 14th Amendment, or order troops to shoot foreigners at the border, but Trump still makes these threats, to rally his supporters and annoy the opposition. Until the whole immigration mess is fixed, these political games will go on.
What law says our military can't defend our borders from an invading force of domestic or foreign people? That would be a pretty stupid law. Serious question.

I believe the Coast Guard has done it numerous times.
In the end, they will all pretty much taste the same.

User avatar
silverscreenselect
Posts: 17013
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:21 pm
Contact:

Re: Mueller Has (Probably) Subpoenaed Donny

#22 Post by silverscreenselect » Fri Nov 02, 2018 10:51 am

BackInTex wrote:
What law says our military can't defend our borders from an invading force of domestic or foreign people? That would be a pretty stupid law. Serious question.

I believe the Coast Guard has done it numerous times.
We sent troops into Mexico after Pancho Villa before World War I (with mixed success), but it's ridiculous to consider these families in the caravan as an "invading force." That is unless you're Donald Trump trying to stir up anti-immigrant and anti-Hispanic sentiment as an 11th hour political ploy It's interesting that Republican candidates in battleground states of Nevada and Arizona, who theoretically would be among the most at risk in the event of an actual invasion from the south, asked Trump not to show up in their states for a rally this week.
Check out our website: http://www.silverscreenvideos.com

User avatar
jarnon
Posts: 4976
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 9:52 pm
Location: Merion, Pa.

Re: Mueller Has (Probably) Subpoenaed Donny

#23 Post by jarnon » Fri Nov 02, 2018 11:08 am

silverscreenselect wrote:
BackInTex wrote:
What law says our military can't defend our borders from an invading force of domestic or foreign people? That would be a pretty stupid law. Serious question.

I believe the Coast Guard has done it numerous times.
We sent troops into Mexico after Pancho Villa before World War I (with mixed success), but it's ridiculous to consider these families in the caravan as an "invading force."
This is what Republicans are afraid of:


User avatar
BackInTex
Posts: 10832
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:43 pm
Location: In Texas of course!

Re: Mueller Has (Probably) Subpoenaed Donny

#24 Post by BackInTex » Fri Nov 02, 2018 11:11 am

jarnon wrote:
silverscreenselect wrote:
BackInTex wrote:
What law says our military can't defend our borders from an invading force of domestic or foreign people? That would be a pretty stupid law. Serious question.

I believe the Coast Guard has done it numerous times.
We sent troops into Mexico after Pancho Villa before World War I (with mixed success), but it's ridiculous to consider these families in the caravan as an "invading force."
This is what Republicans are afraid of:
Nope, but you can keep putting your head in the sand and pretend that it is.
In the end, they will all pretty much taste the same.

User avatar
Bob78164
Bored Moderator
Posts: 18808
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:02 pm
Location: By the phone

Re: Mueller Has (Probably) Subpoenaed Donny

#25 Post by Bob78164 » Fri Nov 02, 2018 11:38 am

BackInTex wrote:
jarnon wrote:
silverscreenselect wrote:
We sent troops into Mexico after Pancho Villa before World War I (with mixed success), but it's ridiculous to consider these families in the caravan as an "invading force."
This is what Republicans are afraid of:
Nope, but you can keep putting your head in the sand and pretend that it is.
Well, that's the view of the Pentagon so I guess we're in good company. --Bob
"Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear." Thomas Jefferson

Post Reply